MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384930620 · doi:10.1142/s0219519423400687

KNEE REPLACEMENT RISK PREDICTION MODELING fOR KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS USING CLINICAL AND MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGE FEATURES: DATA FROM THE OSTEOARTHRITIS INITIATIVE

2023· article· en· W4384930620 on OpenAlex
Yang Li, Feng Xiao, Chong Cheng

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mechanics in Medicine and Biology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteoarthritisUnivariateNomogramWOMACLasso (programming language)Proportional hazards modelMedicineFeature selectionMagnetic resonance imagingArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceRadiologyMachine learningSurgeryInternal medicineMultivariate statisticsPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to develop effective predictive models to assess knee replacement (KR) risk in knee osteoarthritis (KOA) patients, which is important in the personalized diagnosis, assessment, and treatment of KOA. A total of 269[Formula: see text]KOA patients were selected from the osteoarthritis initiative (OAI) public database and their clinical and knee cartilage image feature data were included in this study. First, the clinical risk factors were screened using univariate Cox regression and then used in the construction of the Clinical model. Next, their image features were selected using univariate and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) Cox methods step by step, and then used in the construction of the Image model. Finally, the Image+Clinical model was constructed by combining the Image model and clinical risk factors, which was then converted into a nomogram for better visualization and future clinical use. All models were validated and compared using the metric of C-index. In addition, Kaplan–Meier (KM) survival curve with log-rank test and calibration curve were also included in the assessment of the model risk stratification ability and prediction consistency. Age and three Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) scores were found significantly correlated with KR, and thus included in Clinical model construction. Fifty-eight features were selected from 92[Formula: see text]knee cartilage image features using univariate cox, and four image features were retained using the LASSO Cox method. Image+Clinical model and nomogram were finally constructed by combining clinical risk factors and the Image model. Among all models, the Image+Clinical model showed the best predictive performance, and the Image model was better than the Clinical model in the KR risk predictive consistency. By determining an optimal cutoff value, both Image and Image+Clinical models could effectively stratify the KOA patients into KR high-risk and low-risk groups (log-rank test: [Formula: see text]). In addition, the calibration curves also showed that model predictions were in excellent agreement with the actual observations for both 3-year and 6-year KR risk probabilities, both in training and test sets. The constructed model and nomogram showed excellent risk stratification and prediction ability, which can be used as a useful tool to evaluate the progress and prognosis of KOA patients individually, and guide the clinical decision-making of KOA treatment and prognosis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.550

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.126
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it